The basic neoclassical growth model accounts well for the postwar cyclical behavior of the U.S. economy prior to the 1990s, provided that variations in population growth, depreciation rates, total factor productivity, and taxes are incorporated. For the 1990s, the model predicts a depressed economy, when in fact the U.S. economy boomed. We extend the base model by introducing intangible investment and non-neutral technology change with respect to producing intangible investment goods and find that the 1990s are not puzzling in light of this new theory. There is compelling micro and macro evidence for our extension, and the predictions of the theory are in conformity with U.S. national products, incomes, and capital gains. We use the theory to compare current accounting measures for labor productivity and investment with the corresponding measures for the model economy with intangible investment. Our findings show that standard accounting measures greatly understate the boom in productivity and investment. ; Earlier title: Why did U.S. market hours boom in the 1990s?
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis in its series Staff Report with number
369.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: